Canadian Gun Control Fails

National Post (Canada) June 15, 2004 Tuesday National Edition

BYLINE: John R. Lott Jr. and Eli Lehrer

BODY: Gun control has not worked in Canada. Since the new gun registration program started in 1998, the U.S. homicide rate has fallen, but the Canadian rate has increased. The net cost of Canada's gun registry has surged beyond $1-billion -- more than 500 times the amount originally estimated. Despite this, the Canadian government recently admitted it could not identify a single violent crime that had been solved through registration. Public confidence in the government's ability to fight crime has also eroded, with one recent survey showing only 17% of voters support the registration program.

So, if this hasn't worked, what's the solution? The NDP, which polls indicate may hold the balance of power in Parliament after June 28, has proposed a radical solution: "going across the border to the U.S. and actively engaging in lobbying to have gun -control laws in the U.S. strengthened."

This is part of an ironic pattern: When gun control laws fail -- as they consistently do, whether in Canada, the United States or other countries -- politicians seek to pass new laws rather than eliminate the old ones. In the United States, gun -control groups now claim that the 1994 Brady Act implementing background checks and assault-weapon bans failed to reduce crime only because they didn't go far enough; and that city bans on handguns in Chicago and Washington, D.C., failed only because other jurisdictions didn't follow suit.

The same logic applies overseas: With violent crime and gun crime soaring in the United Kingdom, where handguns are already banned, the British government is banning imitation guns. And in Australia, state governments are banning ceremonial swords.

Yet, the laws in Australia, Britain and Canada were adopted under what gun control advocates would argue were ideal conditions. All three countries adopted laws that applied to the entire country. Australia and Britain are surrounded by water, and thus do not have the easy smuggling problem that Canada claims with regard to the United States. The new attempts to ban toys or cast blame on the United States, reek of desperation.

Crime did not fall in England after handguns were banned in 1997. Quite the contrary, crime rose sharply. In May, the British government reported that gun crime in England and Wales nearly doubled in the last four years. Serious violent crime rates from 1997 to 2002 averaged 29% higher than 1996; robbery was 24% higher; murders 27% higher. Before the law, armed robberies had fallen by 50% from 1993 to 1997, but as soon as handguns were banned, the armed robbery rate shot back up, almost back to their 1993 levels. The violent crime rate in England is now double that in the United States.

Australia saw its violent crime rates soar after its 1996 gun control measures banned most firearms. Violent crime rates averaged 32% higher in the six years after the law was passed than they did the year before the law went into effect. Murder and manslaughter rates remained unchanged, but armed robbery rates increased 74%, aggravated assaults by 32%. Australia's violent crime rate is also now double America's. In contrast, the United States took the opposite approach and made it easier for individuals to carry guns. Thirty-seven of the 50 states now have right-to-carry laws that let law-abiding adults carry concealed handguns once they pass a criminal background check. Violent crime in the United States has fallen much faster than in Canada, and violent crime has fallen even faster inright-to-carry states than for the nation as a whole. The states with the fastest growth in gun ownership have also experienced the biggest drops in violent crime rates.

It is understandable that Canadians are focusing on crime as the election nears. Everyone wants to take guns away from criminals. The problem is that law-abiding citizens obey the laws and criminals don't. Even in the unlikely event that a Canadian government were to convince the United States to ban guns, that would provide no more of a magic solution to Canadian crime than its own failed gun registry.TOPICS:Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; GovernmentKEYWORDS:bang; banglist; johnlottNavigation: use the links below to view more comments.first1-20, 21-39nextlast

Exactly. Even Canadians otherwise enamored of Big Government are starting to realize wasting $1 billion on making law-abiding citizens criminals hasn't reduced real crime by one iota. What is gun registry? Its symbolism over substance. And $1 billion is a huge price to pay for the mere illusion all the guns in the country are being kept track of.

9
posted on 06/17/2004 7:25:07 PM PDT
by goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)

If the NDP wins on the 28th, they propose invading our country with the intent of directly interfering with our government and its policies?!?

I wouldn't worry about that--the best they can hope for is a coalition with the Liberals, but with the way the polls are trending, the Conservatives are probably going to have enough to beat out a Lib/NDP coalition.

I never fire warning shots.If I shoot, I intend to kill.That I have not yet shot to kill, is more a measure of my skill in avoiding lethal situations, and has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not I am listed in a registry anywhere as owning a gun.

I know of many ways to kill.I don't need a gun to do so.A gun just makes it more likely that I would survive a lethal confrontation with a criminal.

If you heard the first shot, and it's not the last thing you ever heard, a reasonable person should consider it a tracer round. ;^)

11
posted on 06/17/2004 7:46:36 PM PDT
by sarasmom
(Sometimes, I wish liberals had beliefs, so I could desecrate them. (spok))

What disturbs me most about gun control is the totalitarian impulse that lies so close under the exterior of its adherents. A political system that claims that it cannot function unless all the world is forced to adhere to it is inherently evil - on a small scale we see this in gun control, on a large one World Socialism, or radical Islam. The excuse is always twofold - first, that the existence of an area that is not under the control of that system allows the influx of prohibited items, or ideas, to the purer homeland; and second, and far more perniciously, that such an area constitutes a place to which dissenters may escape. "No one shall differ anywhere" is not the slogan of a free man, it is the slogan of a religious fanatic and a tyrant.

"We'll give you three steps to the door. After that, we get colonial on your @ss, got it, NDP?"

You ever hear the old saying, "Those who forget History are doomed to repeat History?" One of the reasons for that trumped up war we called the War of 1812, was that we got all full of ourselves and started eyeing Canada for it's vast realm of natural resources and wealth potential. So when we went to war with the Brits, we naturally also invaded Canada. They proceeded to kick our A$$, B-A-D.

So, like the Black Knight in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail," with both legs and both arms off; nothing but a torso on the trail, we said: "Okay we'll call it a draw!" Then we negotiated with Great Britain. The upshot was we asked the Brits: "Why did you start this stupid war?" They replied: "US? You started it, first!" And so it goes. But we learned a lesson about our northern neighbors. I trained with the Canadian army in the 1980's. Not a large military force. But they are a group of serious professionals!

I think these guys are not talking about a literal invasion, just politics as usual. The Canadians feel much the same toward their group of bottomfeeding pols as we do. Still, they have never had the benefit as we have of a Constitution that actually restrains their government from messing them over. They could correct this. In fact, they could have corrected the whole gun control mess. I fear they are already victims of a NWO mentality. So are the Aussies.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.